CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR A NEW VOTING SYSTEM RFP# NVS0305 Date: March 31, 2005 Pre-Proposal Conference: May 2, 2005 Deadline for Submission: June 3, 2005
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR NEW VOTING SYSTEM Table of Contents I. Introduction 2 II. Scope of Work 6 III. Submission Requirements 13 IV. Evaluation and Selection Criteria 19 V. Schedule 28 VI. Terms and Conditions for Receipt of Proposals 30 VII. City Contract Requirements 34 VIII. Protest Procedures 36 Appendices: A. Human Rights Commission Forms B. Standard City Forms to be Submitted and Approved Prior to Contract Award C. Model Agreement for Professional Services (form P-500 Rev. 1.05) I. Services to be Provide by Contractor II. Calculation of Charges D. Instant Runoff Voting, San Francisco Charter 13.102 E. Design, Fabrication and Performance Requirements F. Description of Ancillary Services G. Pilot Program H. Model Mandatory Terms of Final Agreement (Model) I. Questionnaire J. Model Agreement for Software Development and Professional Services a) Sub-Appendix A: Performance Specifications b) Sub-Appendix B: Specifications c) Sub-Appendix C: Project Schedule d) Sub-Appendix D: Acceptance Test Plan K. Model Performance and Payment Bonds* I. Model Performance Bond (Rev. 2.05) II. Model Payment (Labor and Material) Bond (Rev. 2.05) L. Model Financing Agreement* M. Model Escrow Agreement* a) Sub-Appendix A: Permitted Investments b) Sub-Appendix B: Internal Escrow Agreement Form of Payment Request and Acceptance Certificate c) Sub-Appendix C: Fee Schedule N. Model Bid Form* * For use only in connection with an installment purchase with seller financing. Please note that these are samples of forms the City has used in the past. Determination of the form and terms will be made by the City based on the proposals received in response to this RFP. Intro - 2
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR NEW RFP I. Introduction The New System The San Francisco Department of Elections ( DOE ) is issuing this Request for Proposals ( RFP ) seeking proposals ( Proposals ) from qualified entities ( Proposers ) for a new voting system ( New System ) to collect, count, tabulate and report votes for all elections held in the City and County of San Francisco. The New System will combine optical scan technology with direct recording electronic ("DRE") or similar voting technology. The New System must include the capability to count and tabulate ranked-choice ballots and otherwise conduct ranked-choice voting, (also known as instant runoff voting) as required by the San Francisco Charter. The successful Proposer must supply all hardware and software constituting the New System, and all necessary installation, programming, integration, testing, maintenance, support, delivery and storage services (the Ancillary Services ) during the term of the Final Agreement (as defined below). The successful Proposer must also be responsible for obtaining all applicable Federal and State certifications and approvals for the New System in time for successful implementation of the New System for elections on or following January 1, 2006. The City and County of San Francisco As a combined charter City and County, San Francisco (the "City") is a unique election jurisdiction in California. The City has up to or at least 500,000 registered voters and approximately 600 polling locations. Each polling location has approximately six voting booths. San Francisco has two Congressional districts, two State Senate districts, two State Assembly districts, three BART districts, and eleven Supervisorial districts. The number of different ballot types the City may use in an election, which is based in part on the number of districts and political parties, can be as high as 528. The Federal Voting Rights Act requires that San Francisco use trilingual ballots with English, Chinese and Spanish. DOE expects that it will be required to provide ballots in additional languages in the future, as the City's population of minority language speakers increases. Ranked-Choice Voting The City Charter requires that most City officers be elected by majority (rather than plurality) vote. Before March 2002, the Charter provided that if no candidate received a majority of the votes cast for the office at the general municipal election, there would be a separate runoff election between the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes. In both the general and runoff elections, each voter selected a single candidate. In March 2002, San Francisco voters amended the Charter to require the use of rankedchoice ballots to elect most City officers. A copy of the Charter amendment is attached to this Intro - 3
RFP as Appendix D. Ranked choice voting applies to all City elected officials except members of the Board of Education and the Community College Board. Under Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV or Instant Run-off Voting, or IRV ), each voter uses a single ballot to rank a first, second, third, etc. choice among the candidates for each office. The votes are counted in rounds. If one candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes in the first round, then that candidate is elected. If no candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes, the candidate who received the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated. All voters whose first choice was eliminated would have their vote transferred to their second-choice candidate. This process of transferring votes to the voter s next-choice candidate and eliminating candidates with the fewest votes is repeated until one candidate receives more than 50% of the votes. Selection of the New System DRE or similar technology is essential for complying with new legal requirements concerning accessibility for sight-impaired and mobility-impaired voters. However, Optical Scan technology is essential for processing, counting and tabulating absentee ballots, which are a significant component of San Francisco elections. San Francisco currently has more than 103,000 permanent absentee voters. In any given election, DOE receives requests for another 25,000 to 45,000 absentee ballots. In order to maximize the benefits of both voting technologies, the New System must combine Optical Scan and DRE or similar technologies. The selection process for the New System and Ancillary Services will involve three phases: 1) The Initial Selection Process, in which the selection committee established by DOE will select up to three Proposers (the Pilot Proposers ) to participate in a Pilot Program (see Appendix G). 2) The "Pilot Program," in which up to three Pilot Proposers will conduct a demonstration (mock) election at San Francisco City Hall. Members of the public will be invited to cast ballots in the mock election and complete evaluations of the proposed voting systems that will be considered in the Final Selection Process. Before the demonstration election, each Pilot Proposer will conduct thorough logic and accuracy testing, using "test ballots" marked according to scripts approved by DOE. Following the demonstration election, each Pilot Proposer will produce a complete Statement of Vote (SOV) and other reports as determined by DOE, and participate in a Final Interview. The DOE may also request any Proposer to submit a Supplemental Proposal. 3) The Final Selection Process, in which the selection committee established by DOE will advise the Director of Elections of the highest ranking Pilot Proposer to enter into a written Final Agreement to provide the New System and Ancillary Services, on the terms specified in this RFP (as they may be modified by DOE prior to the Final Agreement). All material and services provided to the City in connection with the Pilot Program shall be at the respective Pilot Proposer s sole cost. Each Pilot Proposer must provide a Project Intro - 4
Manager and adequate staff on-site for set-up, testing, operation, maintenance and removal of all equipment, for technical support, and for voter assistance during the demonstration election. The Project Manager will be required to attend all meetings listed in the schedule (Section 5B) and will be the main point of contact throughout the entire negotiation of the contract under the RFP. The term of the Final Agreement will be four years, with an option by the City to extend the term, twice, each time for one year. The specific terms and conditions of the Final Agreement depend, in large part, upon the Proposals received by DOE pursuant to this RFP. The City will consider the following options: 1) Outright purchase; 2) installment purchase with seller financing (see Appendices K, L, and M for samples of forms the City has used in the past for seller financing, although proposers should note that determination of the form and terms will be made by the City based on the proposals received in response to this RFP); 3) operating lease for a four-year period; and 4) financing lease for a four-year period; see Appendix L. The Proposer should clarify whether its proposal includes the sale, perpetual license or other transfer to the City of system software and firmware. The Proposer must also indicate the useful life of the New System hardware, software and firmware, and any warranties it will provide for the New System and each of its components. The Final Agreement is subject to successful negotiation of the Agreement and appropriation of funds by the City. Funding The funding for the New System will comprise of the City s funding under The Voting Modernization Board Act of 2002 (Shelley-Hertzberg Act)/Proposition 41 and the Help America Vote Act of 2005 (Public Law 107-252). Intro - 5
II. Scope of Work The Scope of Work described in this Section (and the referenced appendices) is a general guide and is not intended to be a complete list of all work necessary to complete the New System and Ancillary Services. Instead, this Scope of Work outlines the essential features of and requirements for the New System and Ancillary Services. Subsection A describes the essential features and requirements applicable during the term of the Final Agreement, and Subsection B describes the more limited essential features and requirements applicable during the Pilot Program. The specifications set forth in this Scope of Work are based on the New System and Ancillary Services as currently envisioned. DOE anticipates that after the Pilot Program, certain modifications, adjustments or additions may be required. Each Proposer is strongly encouraged to point out in its Proposal any requirements, features or services that the Proposer thinks are necessary or advisable in addition to or in lieu of those specifically identified in this RFP. Most of the features and requirements described in this Section apply to both DRE or similar technology and Optical Scan technology. Wherever application is limited to only one type of technology, the limitation is indicated. A) Final Configuration The New System must be capable of serving 500,000 or more registered voters, in 600 polling places spread among two Congressional districts, two State Senate districts, two State Assembly districts, three BART districts, and eleven Supervisorial districts, in English, Chinese and Spanish. The New System must include: The Proposer must submit a New System based on Optical Scan technology, with one (1) Optical Scan ballot counter for 600 individual precincts. It is currently anticipated that this will require one (1) counter at each precinct, plus 30 backup counters. The proposed New System shall also include 2 ballot counters using Optical Scan Technology for counting absentee ballots at the Department s Central Processing Center. Under the Help America Vote Act of 2005 (Public Law 107-252), all 600 precincts will be required to provide one (1) voting unit that is fully accessible to voters with disabilities. In addition, the City is requiring 30 back-up voting units. In addition to the aforementioned mandatory requirement, the Proposer may submit pricing based upon DRE or similar technologies that display a ballot image, with six (6) voting devices for each of the 600 precincts, plus 200 backup units. The proposed New System shall also include 2 ballot counters using Optical Scan Technology for counting absentee ballots at the Department s Central Processing Center. 1) If Proposer submits a bid based only on DRE or similar technologies and does not submit a bid based on Optical Scan technologies, the City will not evaluate the Proposers bid. Intro - 6
2) If funds are available on or before proposals are due on June 3, 2005, the City may include the alternate proposal in their price evaluation. Capability to design, layout and produce all ballots and ballot images, including sample, provisional and absentee ballots, and to fully integrate these ballot design and production functions, however, no successful bidder can expect ballot printing and production to be included in any subsequent contract associated with this RFP. Ballot printing and production will be at DOE s discretion and no Proposer should include ballot printing and production as a necessary component of its bid. Capability to have ballot image report reflect exact replication of voters voted ballot. This shall include a separate and clear indication of overvotes, undervotes on all ballots as well as indication of exhausted RCV ballots. Capability to have ballot image report include DOE-assigned precinct and district numbers respectively. Capability to have ballot image report state name of contest and whether ballot was cast at precinct or by absentee vote. Absentee and early voting capability, including early voting at multiple locations specified by DOE. Ranked-choice voting capability, which permits the voter to indicate as many choices as there are candidates and qualified write-in candidates for the particular office as specified in this RFP and the referenced appendices. Accessibility for voters with disabilities, including but not limited to non-visual accessibility for the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same opportunity for access and participation, including privacy and independence, as for other voters as per all applicable laws during the final term of the agreement. Capability to accommodate any increase in the number of registered voters and any reprecincting during the term of the Final Agreement. Capability to add more languages and to provide alternative language accessibility pursuant to the requirements of section 203 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and subsequent amendments, and Section 401 of the City s Municipal Election Law. Capability to clearly identify or prevent voter error or omission conditions for all ballots, including but not limited to overvotes, undervotes, skipped ranks and multiple rankings on ranked-choice ballots as specified in this RFP, and capability to provide clear error and/or omission messages as specified in this RFP to voters whose ballots contain such error and/or omission conditions and provide the voter with the opportunity to correct or complete the ballot. Complete integration of components of the New System and compatibility with the City's current and future voter database software (currently DIMSNet). Intro - 7
Capability to simultaneously and securely transmit precinct results from multiple transmission centers by electronic means to a central location specified by DOE, to facilitate rapid reporting of results after the polling places close, including reporting to the SOS. Capability to provide precinct specific vote totals on Election Night and produce a paper record to be left at each precinct as required by Section 13.107.5 of the City s Charter. Capability to quickly and easily integrate precinct data with absentee voting data. Capability to process write-in and provisional votes with a minimum of manual dataentry, and capability to quickly and easily integrate this data with other election data. One central vote collection and tabulation system (the "Central Processing Network"). Capability to apply the RCV algorithm to the election results at any time between the time the polling places close on election day and the time DOE certifies the results of the election. Capability to apply the RCV algorithm to the election results in each precinct, Supervisorial district and citywide. Production of all documentation necessary for an audit trail and production of elections reports including absentee voting results, Election Day results, neighborhood results and a complete Statement of Vote. The documentation for each RCV contest must include the tabulation at each stage of the process in which one or more candidates are eliminated and votes are redistributed, and must clearly indicate the redistribution of votes at each stage of the RCV process. Capability to export all election data and reports in a format that can be quickly and easily uploaded into a DOE database and to other mediums as requested. Any ancillary devices required at each of the precincts, which may include electronic rosters, electronic street indices, coded cards for activating DRE or similar voting devices, card-coding equipment, auxiliary power supplies, and printers for creation of a permanent paper record and audit trail. All consumables required to support the final configuration of the New System during the term of the Final Agreement. Provide storage for all equipment at a facility that includes enough space and infrastructure to conduct all Logic and Accuracy tests and stage the equipment for delivery and return. Spare and repair parts as required to support the final configuration of the New System during the term of the Final Agreement. Intro - 8
Upgrades, patches and modifications developed by the Proposer to improve the New System or developed and made generally available to Proposer's other customers during the term of the Final Agreement. All upgrades, patches and modifications of software and/or hardware are to receive prior approval from DOE; an itemized listing of costs associated with these changes shall also be presented at time of proposal. Federal and State certified upgrades, patches and modifications developed by the Proposer to conform the New System to changes in Federal, State and City laws and regulations during the term of the Final Agreement, including but not limited to upgrades necessary to produce a voter-verified audit trail. In addition, the New System must meet all design, fabrication and performance requirements set forth in Appendix E to this RFP and all ancillary service requirements set forth in Appendix F to this RFP. If a proposed New System does not meet one or more of these requirements, the Proposer may suggest the incorporation of an alternate feature that provides a functional equivalent. The Proposer is responsible for obtaining all necessary Federal and State certifications and approvals for the New System, so that the New System is fully certified, approved and tested in time to be implemented for the any election conducted on or after January 1, 2006. The Proposer must obtain all certifications and approvals, including but not limited to final certification by the SOS, no later than January 1, 2006 (the "Certification Date"). Time is of the essence with respect to this Certification Date. The Proposer is also responsible for delivery to DOE of the certified and approved RCV New System no later than February 10, 2006 (the "Delivery Date"). Time is of the essence with respect to this Delivery Date. The Proposer is also responsible for fully testing the New System at DOE or a location agreed to by DOE, including but not limited to the initial acceptance testing, final acceptance testing and end-to-end testing specified in this RFP and referenced appendices. The Proposer must complete all required testing no later than February 24, 2006 (the "Testing Completion Date"). Time is of the essence with respect to this Testing Completion Date. The City intends to minimize its payments under the Final Agreement until the successful Proposer complies with all of the requirements to meet the milestones described above for the Certification Date, Delivery Date and Testing Completion Date. The City will require that the Final Agreement include financial incentives for the Successful Proposer to obtain certification for and delivery and testing of the New System ahead of schedule. The City will also require that the Final Agreement include retainages of at least 15% of progress payments until the Successful Proposer complies with the certification, delivery and testing requirements. In addition, the City will require that the Final Agreement provide for liquidated damages if the Successful Proposer fails to meet the certification, delivery and testing deadlines. These financial incentives, retainages and liquidated damages will be negotiated as part of the Final Agreement. Intro - 9
The Ancillary Services to be provided by the Proposer shall include all necessary delivery, installation, testing, training, logistical support, hardware and software maintenance, and delivery and storage services during the term of the Final Agreement. These requirements are set forth in more detail in Appendix F to this RFP. B) The Pilot Program No more than three Pilot Proposers chosen in the Initial Selection Process will participate simultaneously in a Pilot Program. The Pilot Program will have three phases. The first phase will consist of a logic and accuracy test conducted with "test ballots" marked according to a script prepared by the DOE. The second phase will consist of a demonstration (mock) election conducted at City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco during a period specified by DOE. The final phase will consist of a Statement of Vote and any other reports requested by DOE, an interview and a Supplemental Proposal (if requested). Each Pilot Proposer s configuration of the proposed New System during the Pilot Program must include: A proposed New System based on Optical Scan Technology, at least two Optical Scan ballot counters, plus at least one (1) device for processing absentee ballots if the device is different from the precinct ballot counters. If DOE is to consider a New System based on DRE or similar technology, at least two voting devices that display a ballot image for individuals with disabilities. Ranked-choice voting capability, which permits the voter to indicate as many choices as there are candidates and qualified write-in candidates for the RCV contest(s) as specified in this RFP and the referenced appendices. Accessibility for voters who speak English, Chinese and/or Spanish. Accessibility for voters with disabilities, including but not limited to non-visual accessibility for the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same opportunity for access and participation, including privacy and independence, as for other voters as per all applicable laws during the final term of the agreement. Capability to identify or prevent ballot error conditions, including but not limited to overvotes, undervotes, skipped ranks and multiple rankings on ranked-choice ballots as specified in this RFP, and capability to provide error and/or omission messages as specified in this RFP to voters whose ballots contain such error conditions and provide the voter with the opportunity to correct the ballot. Capability to process write-in and provisional votes with a minimum of manual dataentry, and capability to quickly and easily integrate this data with other election data. Intro - 10
Capability to securely transmit results of the demonstration election by electronic means to a location specified by DOE and to fully integrate "precinct" data with "absentee voting" data, to facilitate rapid reporting of results at the end of the demonstration election, including reports required by the Secretary of State. Capability to apply the RCV algorithm to the integrated election results. Production of all documentation necessary for an audit trail for the demonstration election and production of elections reports including a Statement of Vote and individual precinct results for the demonstration election. For each RCV contest, the documentation must include the tabulation at each stage of the RCV process in which one or more candidates are eliminated and votes are redistributed, and must clearly indicate the redistribution of votes at each stage of the RCV process including overvotes, undervotes and exhausted ballots. Capability to export all election data reports in a format that can be quickly and easily uploaded into a DOE database and other media. Any ancillary devices that would be required at a precinct, which may include electronic rosters, electronic street indices, coded cards for activating the DRE or similar voting devices, card-coding equipment, auxiliary power supplies, and printers for creation of a permanent paper record and audit trail. All consumables required to support the Proposed New System during the Pilot Program. Spare and repair parts as required to support the Proposed New System during the Pilot Program. Phase One. The logic and accuracy test will include the same fictional candidates and fictional measures that appear on the ballot in the demonstration election. The Pilot Proposer must provide electronic and paper "test ballots" marked according to a script prepared by the Pilot Proposer and approved by DOE for thorough logic and accuracy testing of the proposed New System. Phase Two. The demonstration election will include fictional candidates and fictional measures determined by the City in its sole discretion, including at least two (2) RCV contests. The demonstration election must be fully operational and open to voters from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The demonstration election will also include: design and production of the ballot, sample ballot and ballot image; counting, tabulation, transmission, integration and reporting of data and results as specified in this RFP and the referenced appendices; and any other reports requested by DOE. The City will invite members of the public to cast ballots in the mock election and complete evaluations of the proposed voting systems. The Selection Committee will consider these evaluations in the Final Selection Process. Members of the Selection Committee may also cast ballots and get hands-on experience with each of the proposed voting systems during the Pilot Program. Intro - 11
Ballot formats shall allow the use of all special options as enabled by the State Elections Code and subsequent amendments, San Francisco s Charter and Municipal Elections Code, including but not limited to cross-voting among parties in open, blanket and unitary primary elections, and ranked-choice voting for local officeholders. Phase Three: The Pilot Proposer must complete a Statement of Vote as well as any other reports requested by DOE. It is anticipated that the majority of these requests will be based on summary information by precinct or other voting entities and must be presented in electronic and hard copy format. The intent for using this information is to upload election results to the Internet or other forms of public dissemination. Phase Four: Following review of the Pilot Program, an interview will take place with Proposer to address any issues or concerns noted during the Pilot Program. Phase Five: Following Phase Four, the DOE reserves the right to request Proposer to submit a written supplement to it s original proposal addressing issues and/or questions raised during the Pilot Program and/or Final Interview. In addition, during the Pilot Program each proposed New System must meet all of the requirements set forth in Appendix G to this RFP. Also during the Pilot Program, each Pilot Proposer must provide Ancillary Services, including all necessary delivery, installation, testing, training, logistical support, hardware and software maintenance, delivery and storage services, which are also set forth in Appendix G to this RFP. Intro - 12
III. Submission Requirements A. Time and Place for Submission of Proposals Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m., on June 3, 2005. Postmarks will not be considered in judging the timeliness of submissions. Proposals may be delivered in person or mailed to: Beth Lipski Department of Elections City Hall, Room 48 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place San Francisco CA 94102 Re: Proposal for New Voting System Proposers shall submit an original plus ten (10) copies of the proposal clearly marked New Voting System to the above location. Proposals that are submitted by fax will not be accepted. Late submissions will not be considered. B. Format and Content of Proposals Proposers must submit the following information in the order specified below. Any material deviation from these requirements may be cause for rejection of a Proposal. Only one Proposal will be accepted from any one person, partnership, corporation or other entity, however, several alternatives may be included in one Proposal. 1) Cover Letter and Executive Summary. A cover letter including all of the following: a. The Proposer's legal name. b. The Proposer s organizational structure (e.g., corporation, partnership, limited liability company, etc.), the jurisdiction in which the Proposer is organized and the date of such organization. c. The address of the Proposer s headquarters and any local office involved in the Proposal. d. The Proposer s Federal Tax Identification Number. e. The name, address, telephone and fax numbers of the person(s) who will serve as the contact(s) with the City, with authorization to make representations on behalf of and to bind the Proposer. f. Except as provided in Section IV(A) of this RFP, the representation that the Proposer has all necessary licenses, permits, approvals and authorizations necessary in order to perform all of the Proposer s obligations in connection with this RFP, the New System, the Ancillary Services and the Final Agreement. (As indicated in Section IV(A), DOE will accept proposals that include components or features not previously tested by either the ITA or the SOS, or both, provided that the proposal meets all other minimum qualification requirements and demonstrates to DOE's satisfaction that the required approvals are likely to be received in a timely fashion.) g. A representation that the Proposer is willing and able to perform the commitments contained in the proposal. h. An acceptance of all conditions and requirements contained in this RFP. Intro - 13
i. A brief synopsis of the Proposal that is non-technical, easy to understand, and under two pages in length. This letter must be signed by a person authorized by the Proposer to obligate the Proposer to perform the commitments contained in the proposal. 2) Table of Contents. A table of contents listing the individual sections of the Proposal and the corresponding page numbers. 3) Qualifications and Experience. A description of the Proposer's qualifications and experience that pertain to this RFP. (See the Minimum Qualification Requirements in Section IV(A) of this RFP.) This description should not exceed five pages and should include a detailed summary of the Proposer s experience relative to voting systems similar to the New System and services similar to the Ancillary Services. 4) Financial Statements. Copies of the Proposer's audited financial statements for 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 with an opinion from a certified public accountant or accountancy firm. 5) Project Personnel - Qualifications and Experience. A list identifying: a) the project manager; b) each key person on the project team; c) the role that each member of the project team will play in the project; and d) a written assurance that the key individuals listed and identified will be performing the work and will not be substituted with other personnel or reassigned to another project without DOE s prior approval. For each key person on the project team, provide a description of the person's experience and qualifications, including brief resumes if necessary. 6) Project Approach. Describe the services and activities Proposer would provide to the City, including: overall scope of work tasks; schedule and ability to complete the project in compliance with the Certification Date, Delivery Date and Testing Completion Date, and in time for full implementation of the New System for elections on or following January 1, 2006 and through the term of the final agreement. Describe the assignment of work within Proposer's team and the assignment of the work proposed for DOE within the team. Describe how Proposer approached and managed implementation of one or more similar voting systems, including a description of the project plan, the procedures to identify and resolve implementation problems, and the implementation schedule. 7) Description of the Proposed New System. A description of the proposed New System, as it will be finally configured and as it will be configured during the Pilot Program. The description should specify how the proposed New System will meet or exceed the requirements of the City. The description should explain any advantages that this proposed New System would have over other possible New Systems, and any disadvantages or limitations. The description should also indicate all warranties and schedule of maintenance provided by the Proposer. Intro - 14
8) Description of the Proposed Ancillary Services. A description of the terms and conditions under which each type of Ancillary Services required by this RFP or proposed by Proposer will be provided during the term of the Final Agreement and during the Pilot Program, including response times. The description should identify spare or replacement parts that will be required in performing maintenance services, the storage location(s) of such spare parts, how quickly such parts shall be available for repairs and indicate (itemize) all additional costs associated with these services. The description must also: a) specify how the Ancillary Services in the Proposal will meet or exceed the requirements of the City; b) explain any special resources, procedures or approaches that make the Ancillary Services of the Proposer particularly advantageous to the City; c) identify any limitations or restrictions of the Proposer in providing the Ancillary Services; and d) compare the proposed Ancillary Services with those currently provided to other cities and counties. 9) Sample Ballot. A sample ballot in the form of one or more ballot cards (Optical Scan Technology) or hard copies of one or more ballot images (DRE or similar technology). The sample ballot must be in English, Chinese and Spanish and must include: at least two RCV contest with at least ten candidates; at least one county central committee contest; at least one superior court contest; and at least five ballot measures. 10) Implementation Plan and Schedule. A plan for implementing the proposed New System and Ancillary Services during the Final Agreement. The plan must include a plan for acceptance testing that meets the requirements of Appendix F to this RFP. In addition, the plan must include a detailed schedule indicating how the Proposer will ensure, if awarded the contract, compliance with the Certification Date, Delivery Date and Testing Completion Date and full implementation of the New System for elections on or following January 1, 2006 and through the term of the Final Agreement. 11) Evidence of Testing and Certification. If all or any part of the proposed New System has successfully completed the qualification testing requirements defined in the Voting System Standards (as defined in Appendix E to this RFP), and if all or any part of the proposed New System has been fully tested and certified by the California Secretary of State (SOS) as required by the California Elections Code, the Proposer must provide evidence of this testing and certification. As stated in Section IV(A) of this RFP, evidence of qualification testing and certification by the federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) and/or the SOS is not a minimum qualification requirement of this RFP, but any Proposer that submits evidence that its proposed New System is fully tested and certified shall receive bonus points during both the initial and final selection process. 12) References. Complete reference information for all similarly sized public institutions or agencies for which the Proposer provides or has provided comparable systems and services in the past five years. Each such reference must include the project name and location, the Intro - 15
scope of services performed and the name, address, telephone and fax numbers of the person who may be contacted for reference information. (See also the Minimum Qualification Requirements in IV(B) of this RFP.) 13) Pricing. Pricing for the New System for any or all of the following options: a) Outright purchase; b) installment purchase with seller financing (see Appendices K, L, and M for samples of forms the City has used in the past for seller financing, although proposers should note that determination of the form and terms will be made by the City based on the proposals received in response to this RFP); c) operating lease for a four-year period; and d) financing lease for a four-year period; see Appendix L. Each Proposal must state the total cost or price to the City for the New System, including any applicable taxes. Proposers shall be held to their prices unless, during negotiation of the Final Agreement, DOE requests material changes to the proposed system that impose significant additional costs on the Proposer. NOTE: The City expects the successful bidder to include in it s pricing options an amount that represents the vendors buy back of the City s existing optical scan vote tabulation equipment. The City owns approximately 680 Eagle IIIP systems and two IVC units. Pricing for the Ancillary Services should include the following options with respect to each type of service described in Appendix F to this RFP: a) fixed annual, per-election or monthly payment; and b) payment of time and materials charges. Pricing for the New System and Ancillary Services shall exclude all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the Pilot Program. As indicated under Section II(A) of this RFP, the City intends to minimize its payments under the Final Agreement until the successful Proposer complies with all the requirements to meet the milestones described above for the Certification Date, Delivery Date and Testing Completion Date. The City will require that the Final Agreement include financial incentives for the Successful Proposer to obtain certification for, deliver and test the New System ahead of schedule. The City will also require that the Final Agreement include retainages of at least 15% of progress payments until the Successful Proposer complies with the certification, delivery and testing requirements. In addition, the City will require that the Final Agreement provide for liquidated damages if the Successful Proposer fails to meet the certification, delivery and testing deadlines. These financial incentives, retainages and liquidated damages will be negotiated as part of the Final Agreement. 14) Life-Cycle Support. Each Proposal must describe the scope and extent of City resources required to operate and maintain the proposed New System during development, installation, integration and testing of the New System and during the term of the Final Agreement. Intro - 16
15) Required Forms. Prior to executing the Final Agreement, the successful Proposer must execute the Chapter 12B Declaration: Nondiscrimination in Contracts and Benefits form (Form HRC-12B-101) with supporting documentation and secure the approval of the form by the San Francisco Human Rights Commission. See Appendix A to this RFP for more information. 16) Business Tax Registration. A copy of the Proposer s currently valid San Francisco Business Tax Certificate. Proposers who do not have this certificate must apply for a certificate and pay the registration fee in order to participate in the Pilot Program and be eligible to enter into the Final Agreement. See Appendix B to this RFP for more information. 17) Evidence of Insurance. Certificates of insurance from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of California evidencing all coverages for both the Pilot Program and the term of the Final Agreement as required by this RFP. The Proposer will be required to submit complete copies of these certificates. 18) Bonds. Written evidence of the Proposer s ability to obtain from a surety company with a rating of at least A-VIII a Performance Bond and Labor & Materials Bond in the amounts required under Section IV(A) of this RFP (Minimum Qualification Requirements). a) Bid Bond. Each Proposer shall submit with the Supplemental Proposal a certified or cashier's check on a bank authorized to do business in the State of California, money order, or bid bond payable on sight to the City in an amount equal to ten (10) percent of the proposal cost. This shall serve as security for submittal that the Proposer will enter into the Final Agreement if selected and furnish any required bonds. The bid bond shall include provision for forfeiture in any case of failure, neglect, or refusal to perform. 19) Availability for Interviews. The Proposer must agree that, if invited for an oral presentation and interview following the initial evaluation of proposals, the Proposer will be available at DOE's convenience for such presentation and interview. The Proposer must also agree that, if selected as a Pilot Proposer, the Proposer will be available at DOE's convenience for an interview following the Pilot Program. The tentative dates for oral presentations and interviews following the initial evaluation of proposals, and the tentative dates for interviews following the Pilot Program are stated in Section V of this RFP. 20) Execution of Proposal. The Proposal must be signed in blue ink as set forth in this subsection. All persons required to bind the Proposer must sign the Proposal. The Proposal must also include evidence that the person or persons signing the Proposal are authorized to execute the Proposal on behalf of the Proposer: a corporation must submit a copy of the board resolution authorizing such execution. a partnership must submit a copy of its partnership agreement and a list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all general partners. a limited liability company must submit a copy of its membership agreement and a list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all members. a joint venture must submit a copy of its joint venture agreement and a list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all joint venturers. A joint venture must designate Intro - 17
and authorize one person to act on behalf of the joint venture with respect to all matters connected with this RFP. 21) Fee Proposal. The City will award this contract to the Proposer that it considers will provide the best overall program services. The City reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer and to reject any proposals that are not responsive to this RFP. The City reserves the right to end negotiations with a Proposer and begin negotiations with the next highestranking Proposer. Proposers must provide a fee proposal that includes at least the following: a) total cost to the City for each proposal, including alternatives; b) an itemization of cost for each proposal, including alternatives; and c) hourly rates for each team member. Hourly rates and itemized costs may be used to negotiate changes in the Scope of Work if necessary. Intro - 18
A) Minimum Qualifications IV. Evaluation and Selection Criteria The following minimum requirements shall be continuing requirements through the Pilot Program and full execution of a Final Agreement. If a Proposer satisfies these requirements at the time it submits its proposal, but is unable to satisfy these requirements continuously until DOE has a fully executed Final Agreement, DOE may declare that Proposer non-responsive on the determination that the Proposer no longer satisfies the minimum requirements: Prime and Subcontractors. Proposers who intend to perform the work required by the Final Agreement as a team of prime and subcontractors must demonstrate the prime contractor's compliance with these minimum requirements. If the Proposer intends to use subcontractors, the subcontractors must be clearly identified in the proposal. The scope of work must be explicit and is subject to approval by the DOE. Joint Venturers. Proposers who intend to perform the work required by the Final Agreement as a joint venture must demonstrate their compliance with the minimum requirements by showing that the joint venture as a whole meets the minimum requirements of this section. Each minimum requirement enumerated herein must be met in its entirety by at least one of the joint venture partners, unless otherwise specified. For example, if the requirement is five (5) years minimum experience, one firm among the joint venture partners must have five years' experience; e.g., the requirement cannot be met by five joint venture partners each with one (1) year's experience. At the time that a proposal is submitted a joint venture must be a legally constituted entity by means of a binding joint venture agreement that makes the joint venture partners jointly and severally liable to the City for performance of the Final Agreement. For more information on City requirements for joint ventures, consult the San Francisco Human Rights Commission at (415) 252-2500. Proposers must meet the following requirements to be considered for selection as a Pilot Proposer and for the Final Agreement. Any proposal that does not demonstrate that the Proposer meets these minimum requirements by the deadline for submittal of proposals will be considered non-responsive and will not be eligible for award of the contract. 1) Relevant Experience. Each Proposer must verify a minimum of five (5) years of continuous experience operating and servicing voting systems for a city or county with a population of at least 800,000 people and must submit a letter (or letters) of reference verifying and describing this experience. 2) Performance Bond, Labor & Materials Bond. The City will require the successful Proposer to provide a Performance Bond and a Labor & Materials Bond (in addition to insurance, as specified in this RFP and referenced appendices) for the term of the Pilot Program and the Final Agreement. Each Proposer shall submit with its proposal a letter, to the City from a surety company rated A-VIII or higher, stating that the surety company will provide a Performance Bond (and payment bond, if the Proposer intends to use subcontractors) and a Labor & Materials Bond substantially in the form of the bonds attached to this Agreement as Intro - 19
Appendices K-I and K-II respectively. The amount of each bond shall be determined as follows: Performance Bond: Software & Firmware, Hardware, Ancillary Services The Proposer shall estimate the entire cost of the software and firmware, including but not limited to the cost of development and testing, from initiation of the project to final delivery to and acceptance by DOE, and provide a performance bond for 100% of this estimated cost. The Proposer shall estimate the entire cost of the hardware and provide a performance bond for 100% of this estimated cost. The Proposer shall estimate the entire cost of the ancillary services during the term of the Final Agreement and provide a performance bond for 100% of this estimated cost. The Proposer may satisfy this Performance Bond requirement by providing one bond that combines each of the three components described above, or three separate Performance Bonds. Labor & Materials Bond: Software & Firmware, Hardware, Ancillary Services The Proposer shall estimate the cost of the labor and materials for the New System software and firmware and provide a Labor & Materials Bond for 130% of this estimated cost. The Proposer shall estimate the cost of the labor and materials for the New System hardware and provide a Labor & Materials Bond for 130% of this estimated cost. The Proposer shall estimate the cost of the labor and materials for the ancillary services for the New System during the term of the Final Agreement and provide a Labor & Materials Bond for 130% of this estimated cost. The Proposer may satisfy this Labor & Materials Bond requirement by providing one bond that combines each of the three components described above, or three separate Labor & Materials Bonds. In the alternative, a Proposer may provide an irrevocable letter of credit that is approved by the City's Risk Manager in lieu of any bond required that will be held in place for at least two years after the termination or expiration of the Final Agreement. If the Proposer intends to use subcontractors, the Performance Bond and Payment Bond must each be for the proposed price of the Final Agreement. 3) Questionnaire. Each Proposer shall submit answers to the questions attached to this RFP as Appendix I (the "Questionnaire"). An officer of the Proposer authorized to represent the Proposer must execute the response under penalty of perjury. The signature of the officer should be preceded by the following statement: I hereby affix my signature hereto under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California." The response should be submitted on the Proposer's letterhead. Each response to a question should clearly identify the question being responded to by referencing the number given the question in the Intro - 20
Questionnaire. The City may, at any time during the selection process, ask the Proposer to confirm, under penalty of perjury, the Proposer's ability to comply with the minimum requirements and to reaffirm the responses to the Questionnaire. 4) Preferred, But Not Required, Features: Evidence of Qualification Testing. Proposers should note that evidence of qualification testing and certification by the federal Independent Testing Authority (ITA) and/or the California Secretary of State (SOS) is not a minimum qualification requirement of this RFP. DOE will accept and consider proposals that include components or features not previously tested by either the ITA or the SOS, or both, provided that the proposal meets all other minimum qualification requirements specified in this subsection, and the proposal demonstrates to DOE's satisfaction that the proposed system will receive all required approvals in a timely fashion. However, any Proposer that submits evidence that its proposed New System is fully tested and certified shall receive bonus points during both the initial and final selection process. B. Selection Criteria 1) Selection Committee. All Proposals will be evaluated by the Selection Committee, which will be appointed and convened by the DOE. The Selection Committee will select up to three (3) highest-ranking Proposers in accordance with the selection and scoring criteria set forth in this section to participate in the pilot program. Each round of review will be scored independently from one another. The DOE also reserves the right to invite all respondents to the next stage. Only scores from the final stage of review will count towards a contract award. 2) Selection Criteria a. Evaluation of Written Proposals. The Selection Committee will evaluate each Proposal meeting the minimum qualification requirements set forth in this RFP on a scale of 100 points, with 15 additional points for completion of both ITA and SOS testing and certification for RCV contests on the New System on or before the deadline for submission of proposals. In addition, Proposer may receive up to 10 bonus points for a DBE partnership. Proposals that are unrealistic in terms of the technical or schedule commitments will be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence or indicative of a failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of DOE s requirements as set forth in this RFP. The criteria and point allocations are as follows: Intro - 21